It is generally recognised by commentators and researchers that the next significant frontier in agriculture is the formulation and application of precision agricultural techniques. Precision agriculture means the collection of site-specific information, application of that site-specific information in site-specific analysis, and the subsequent making of decisions in truly site-specific manner.
Fundamental to the philosophy of precision agriculture is the concept of matching site-specific inputs to site-specific needs; if a part of a field needs more fertilizer, give that part more fertilizer; if a section of a crop needs harvesting early, harvest it early. These are simple, common-sense ideas. However, like many good ideas, there is a significant gap between theory and implementation. The use of management zones is currently the most practical way to implement the theory of precision agriculture. However, this is not truly precision agriculture, as the size of the zones and the process of data collection necessarily involves a relatively significant degree of averaging which in turn impacts on how site-specific decision making can be.
One critical area ripe for application of precision agriculture techniques is in feed budgeting systems, allowing farmers to make better decisions regarding feed, production and use.
Some systems have attempted to measure pasture quality by aerial images, or from a top view of plant-matter reflectance. However, such systems only provide information about the uppermost portions of plant matter. The systems fail to provide a detailed, comprehensive measurement of the plant matter quality along the length of the plant matter, including the stem regions. Often plant matter (such as grass), may appear healthy from the top but contain dead material near its base.
Current qualitative systems (laboratory wet chemistry) do not provide the metrics in a sufficient spatial resolution and format which allows farmers to make important land and feed decisions.
Reference to any document in this specification does not constitute an admission that such document is prior art, that it is validly combinable with other documents or that it forms part of the common general knowledge.